Displaying items by tag: Cemex

Weather always seems like an excuse in cement company financial reports. It seems that it can pop up when a producer has nothing else to blame for its poor performance. Except, of course, when there has actually been some bad weather. With this in mind the weather is likely to have a rather larger presence in the next set of results for companies in the Caribbean and Florida in the aftermath of Hurricane Irma. The storm tore across the region in a rough north-western bearing, reaching Category Five hurricane status on the Saffir–Simpson scale with sustained winds of over 252km/hr. It caused loss of life and mass destruction to property and infrastructure.

Bottom lines flutter in the wind as construction markets upend in the wake of the weather. Yet cement companies have a more direct relationship with extreme weather events. Cement plants themselves are large industrial sites with staff and equipment that are vulnerable to the elements. This is covered by a company’s resilience strategy but it can include things like reducing non-essential staff levels, shutting down production and securing a site. Cemex USA, for example, set up telephone lines to help employees in need of assistance for both Hurricane Harvey in Texas in late August 2017 and Irma this week. Titan America shut down its Florida operations over the weekend ahead of Irma and then started reopening them on 12 September 2017.

To look at one facet of preparing a cement plant shutting a clinker kiln down with adequate notice, like for a maintenance period, is one thing. Yet doing it in an emergency is an entirely different proposition as the kiln generally needs time to cool down. Global Cement discovered what happens when a kiln is simply stopped when it visited the Cemex South Ferriby plant in the UK. The plant suffered a complete electrical outage following a tidal surge at the site. A 22m-long section of one of the kiln shells had to be replaced because it had been distorted by the sudden cooling.

Secondly, the concrete that cement is used to make plays a key role in what the Portland Cement Association (PCA) and others call resilient construction. Typically concrete structures and buildings survive extreme weather events better than other weaker building materials. Although a wide range of other factors such as building design, foundations and roofing construction are also important. Notably, much of the footage that emerged during the storm in Florida was shot from concrete buildings. As Cary Cohrs, former chairman of the PCA put it: "The greenest building is the one still standing." At the time of this push 2013 Cohrs and the PCA were lobbying to strengthen US building codes and standards. It is likely that the association will renew its efforts in the wake of Irma.

With the winds slackening, the clean up operation starts. Cemex USA’s Houston Terminal said it had reopened for business after Harvey despite being two feet under water a week earlier. As reports start to emerge about the scale of the devastation in the region following Hurricane Irma the insured losses have been estimated at US$20 – 65bn by analysts quoted by the Financial Times. Two things are certain though. One, bad weather is likely to make an appearance in the third quarter financial reports and, two, the rebuilding is going to need lots of cement.

Guatemala: The Inter-American Cement Federation (FICEM) has appointed Alejandro Ramírez Cantú, the chief executive of Cemex in the Dominican Republic, as its new president for the period 2017 – 2020 at its technical congress. He succeeds Gabriel Restrepo, manager of Institutional Affairs at Cementos Argos, in the role, according to the 7 Dias newspaper.

Ramírez Cantú is an industrial and systems engineer trained at the Tecnológico de Monterrey in Mexico and he holds a Master's Degree in business administration from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. He joined Cemex in 2000 and he has directed operations in Thailand, Puerto Rico, Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic.

After a couple of weeks looking at the capacity-rich cement markets of Angola and Vietnam, we turn our attention this week to some of those countries on the receiving end of overcapacity.

Costa Rica is an unlikely place to start but it came to our attention this week due to a short but significant news item. In summary, the amount of cement imported into Costa Rica increased by a factor of 10 between 2014 and 2016, from around 10,000t to over 100,000t. This is around 5% of its 2Mt/yr domesitic capacity, so the change is already fairly big news. The fact that an incredible 97% of this came from just one country, China, makes the story far more interesting as it shows the effects that Chinese overcapacity can have on smaller markets.

But when we look at how the value of the cement imports has changed over time, we see an even more dynamic shift. While the amount of cement imported into the country increased by nearly 10-fold, the value of the same imports only increased by around half as much between 2014 and 2016. If these figures can be taken at face value, the implication is stark. Taking the very low base as effectively ‘zero,’ each tonne of cement imported must cost around half as much as it used to.

Digging a little deeper and the picture gets more complicated. While they have fallen, Costa Rican cement prices have not fallen by 50% and why the sudden deluge of imports anyway? In 2015 the country changed its rules on cement imports to facilitate more flexible imports and lower prices for consumers. It did this by changing a regulation relating to how long cement can be stored, previously set at just 45 days, with the aim of allowing cement to come from further afield and, crucially, in bulk rather than bags.

The effects on price were immediate. Previously as high as US$13/bag (50kg) in December 2014, fairly high by global standards, Sinocem, the first Chinese importer, immediately sold its first shipment at US$10/bag. This effect of lower prices has now forced the average sales prices down to around US$10/bag across the country by 2017. This is good for consumers but not necessarily the local plants.

Back in 2015, the two local integrated plants operated by Cemex and Holcim warned that cement quality would suffer if cement bags were not used within 45 days. This apparently self-serving ‘warning’ went unheeded by the Ministry of Economy, Industry and Trade (MEIC), which pointed out that other countries in South America, as well as the European Union and United States, had no analogous short use-by dates for cement bags.

The rule remains in place, although discontent rumbles on. Indeed LafargeHolcim noted in its third quarter results for 2016 that ‘Costa Rica was adversely affected by increased foreign imports.’  This may well be a little bit of posturing and it doesn’t square with the fact that Costa Rica exported three times more cement that it imported in 2016. Of total exports of 0.34Mt, over 95% went to neighbouring Nicaragua, which has a single 0.6Mt/yr wet process plant owned by Cemex. It seems that the two Costa Rican plants have found a way to keep a little bit of the Chinese producers’ margin for themselves.

Of course, Chinese cement overcapacity doesn’t only affect the Central American market. It has been rippling all around the Pacific Rim. In July 2017, this column looked at the decision by Cementos Bío Bío to stop making clinker at its Talcahuano plant in Chile. It now favours grinding imported clinker from Asia. Before that, Holcim New Zealand closed its Westport cement plant in 2016, finally admitting that domestic clinker was not viable.

In the grand scheme of things, this all makes sense. The market has forced those operating on thin margins to adjust. Ultimately, the end consumer is likely to benefit from lower prices, at least for as long as reliable low-cost imports can be secured. What happens, however, if China actually gets round to curtailing its rampant cement capacity, or simply decides to charge more for its cement? Flexible imports, the main aim of the Costa Rican rule change, may then prove vital, as long as there is more than one international supplier of cement.

Cement sales volumes are down at the larger multinational cement producers so far in 2017. As the first half-year results emerge, a picture seems to be appearing of sluggish growth at best for the major internationals. Reduced working days and poor weather have been blamed for the underwhelming performance.

Graph 1: Cement sales volumes for selected multinational cement producers during the first half of 2017. Source: Company financial reports.

True, LafargeHolcim’s sales rose by 0.4% year-on-year on a like-for-like basis, probably due to the assets the group has been sloughing off since the merger, but this is hardly the dynamic growth shareholders may have hoped for. Meanwhile, HeidelbergCement, following its acquisition of Italcementi in late 2016, has only been able to increase its cement and clinker sales by 1% for the first half of 2017 once consolidation effects were excluded. Here the problem appears to be reduced sales in both the US and Indonesia at the same time. This then leaves Cemex with a 2% drop in sales volumes to 33.9Mt with a big drop in the US despite a promising construction market otherwise. It blamed the decline on a high comparison base in 2016 and the weather.

The larger regional players examined here appear to have fared better. Both UltraTech Cement in India and Dangote in sub-Saharan Africa reported flat or falling sales volumes. However, delve a little deeper and there’s more going on. UltraTech didn’t offer any reason for the decline although it was likely focused on its acquisition of assets from Jaiprakash Associates and the knock-on from the demonetisation process last year. That purchase increased its cement production capacity by nearly 40% to 91.4Mt/yr from 66.3Mt/yr and it seems keen, to investors at least, that it will be able to rocket up the capacity utilisation rate at the new plants.

Dangote meanwhile has taken a blow from the poor economic situation in Nigeria, where it still produces most of its cement. Here, sales fell by 21.8% to 6.86Mt from 8.77Mt, causing its overall sales to fall by 11.3% to 11.5Mt. Almost incredibly though, as Graph 2 shows, Dangote upped its sales revenue by a whopping 41.2% to US$1.13bn off the back of improved efficiencies and a much better fuel mix in Nigeria. The turnaround is impressive considering the pressure the company faced in 2016. Today’s news that the firm has sold a 2.3% stake to foreign investors adds to the impression of a company on the move.

Graph 2: Sales revenue for selected multinational cement producers during the first half of 2017. Source: Company financial reports.

Looking at overall sales revenue shows a happier picture for most of the producers detailed here, with the exception of HeidelbergCement. Although Graph 2 shows declines for LafargeHolcim and Cemex on a like-for-like basis, at least growth is occurring. HeidelbergCement though has reported static revenue on an adjusted basis for the period. This suggests that the producer has hit problems just as it is starting to integrate the Italcementi assets into its portfolio. In theory the geographic spread of its new production units should shield it from lowered growth elsewhere but if this doesn’t happen it may be in for a rougher ride than LafargeHolcim following its merger.

In summary, being a large-scale multinational cement producer doesn’t quite seem to be offering the balanced growth one might expect so far in 2017. Cement sales volumes are slipping and revenue is also down on a direct comparison basis. It’s barely a case for comparison but smaller regionally based producers like UltraTech Cement and Dangote, in the right locations, seem to be capitalising on their positions. We’ll see how the big Brazilian producers Votorantim and InterCement, Buzzi Unicem and CRH fit this trend when they release their financial results over the next few weeks.

UK: Michel Andre has been appointed as the Country President for Cemex UK. He joins the UK subsidiary of the Mexican-based building materials producer after spending seven years as the Country President for Cemex France. Andre has worked for Cemex’s French business for 12 years with roles in strategic planning and its readymix business. Previous to this he worked for Lafarge in the US and France and was employed by Pricewaterhouse Coopers.

He has also served as a board member and then president of the Unicem Association France, the National Union of Quarrying and Building Materials Industries. His three-year term finished in June 2017.

Andre succeeds Jesús Gonzalez in the UK post. Gonzalez has been promoted to the executive team in Monterrey, Mexico as Executive Vice President Sustainability and Operations Development. His role covers health and safety, operations and technology, energy, sourcing, research and development and sustainability.

Dominican Republic: Alejandro Ramirez Cantu has been appointed as the president of Cemex Dominican Republic. Ramirez succeeds Carlos Emilio Gonzalez, who has held the position since 2011, according to the Diario Libre newspaper. Ramirez will also be responsible for the operations of Cemex in Bahamas and Haiti. He has worked for the building materials producer since 2000, managing operations in Thailand, Puerto Rico and Costa Rica.

2017 has started more uncertainly for the US cement industry than 2016 did according to the latest data from the United States Geological Survey (USGS). Cement shipment data from just two months, January and February 2017, can only present a limited impression of the state of the industry. Yet the key trend to look for in Graph 1 is the growth in Midwestern US states against a decline in the Western ones. Previously in 2016 this region’s shipments sunk below those in the West in December and didn’t overtake them until the spring. This time round they’ve stuck closely and overtaken them already in February 2017.

Graph 1: Portland and blended cement shipments by US Census Bureau region for 2016 to February 2017. Source: USGS.

The Midwest’s cement shipments jumped by 21% year-on-year to 2.2Mt for those first two months. Buzzi Unicem concurred with this picture in the Midwest with its first quarter financial results this week, reporting a boost in deliveries in the region. HeidelbergCement agreed, reporting sales volumes increases in the north of the country and a decrease in the West. In that region the USGS data shows an 8% fall in shipments to 2.2Mt. HeidelbergCement blamed heavy rain and flooding in California and Oregon as the cause of the problems. Another potential reason that the USGS hints at are increasing imports of cement that it says have been rising faster than sales. For example, imports of cement to the US as a whole grew by 23.9% year-on-year to 0.81Mt in February 2017.

Overall though the situation for the larger cement producers has been subdued. Many of them blamed good weather in the first quarter of 2016 giving them a hard quarter to measure against in 2017. For example, LafargeHolcim’s sales volumes of cement fell by 4.5% in North America although it did report sales growth off the back of cement pricing and cost controls. HeidelbergCement may have looked good on paper following its integration of the Italcementi/Essroc assets but its cement volumes only grew by 1% in the period. Cemex too reported a similar scenario with falling sales volumes of 5% but growing sales revenue.

To put this in perspective, as the Portland Cement Association’s (PCA) chief economist Ed Sullivan says in the May 2017 issue of Global Cement Magazine, cement production in the US grew in 2016 and it is expected to continue growing in 2017 and 2018. Just like the start of 2016 (see GCW251) the potential for US construction growth in the year ahead is a quietly confident one but it isn’t assured.

Cemex points out that housing starts rose by 8% in the first quarter of 2017, as did construction spending in the industrial and commercial sector. However, it says that infrastructure spending fell by 9% in February 2017. Indeed this last point is an important one given that one of the major Trump campaign pledges in the 2016 presidential campaign was to build more infrastructure. As commentators in Washington DC including the PCA have asked: where is the Bill? Rightly, the PCA are not letting the lawmakers forget this during ‘Infrastructure week’ as the issue is discussed. The US cement industry needs this.

For further information on the US cement industry take a look at the May 2017 issue of Global Cement Magazine

Today HeidelbergCement publishes its financial results for the first quarter of 2017, giving us an idea of how the year is shaping out for the major cement producers outside of China. Looking at graphs 1 and 2 below of cement production volumes and sales revenue gives the initial impression of a reversal of fortunes for the two leading multinational companies. LafargeHolcim’s production and sales are declining as HeidelbergCement races to catch up, boosted by its acquisition of Italcementi in 2016.

This interpretation would be misleading, however, given that LafargeHolcim has been steadily whittling down its assets to become more profitable and because HeidelbergCement has just taken on a raft of production units. The real figures to look at might be the like-for-like changes with adjustments made for currency, consolidation effects and suchlike. Under these conditions each of the three leading cement producers, with the addition of Cemex, have reported stagnant cement sales in the period. Yet the surprise comes from an analogous look at sales. LafargeHocim and Cemex both reported sales revenue increases of 5 – 6% on a like-for-like basis, whilst HeidelbergCement reported no change. This is further backed up by operating earnings before interest, taxation, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) figures that rose significantly on a like-for-like basis for LafargeHolcim at 8.8%, more modestly at 2% for Cemex but fell by 3% for HeidelbergCement.

Graph 1: Cement sales volumes at selected multinational producers in Q1 2016 and Q1 2017. Sources: company reports.

Graph 2: Sales revenue at selected multinational producers in Q1 2016 and Q1 2017. Sources: company reports.

The tragedy of the picture above appears to be that Eric Olsen, the chief executive officer of LafargeHolcim, has started to turn the company around following the merger between Lafarge and Holcim in 2015, just as he is leaving the company. This week Olsen denied that his departure was related to the Syria scandal but that it was related to ‘tensions’ at the group. The lesson that HeidlebergCement can take from this is that enlarging a building materials company in a supressed global market requires decisive action to maintain profitability. Certainly, if it doesn’t go HeidelbergCement’s way in future months and years then the stability of its management and major shareholders may become apparent. Although it doesn’t mention internal matters, HeidelbergCement does flag up higher geopolitical and macroeconomic risks in its outlook for 2017 as well as a ‘shift of political measures towards protectionism.’ That last one is potentially bad news for a multinational cement producer looking to move excess clinker around as it downsizes towards profitability.

Of the rest of the producers included in the graphs above Dangote Cement is worth some attention. The production and sales figures show a company evolving from a national player into an international one. Challenged by economic problems and a market contraction at home in Nigeria the company is exploding internationally in sub-Saharan Africa. Roughly, it sold a third of its cement outside of Nigeria in the period but only made a quarter of its revenue outside of its home turf. This has interesting implications for the international future of the company. However, it will be a big moment for the firm once it finally builds a plant in Nepal outside of Africa.

Italy’s Buzzi Unicem and the Brazilian operators Votorantim and InterCement are due to release their first quarter results in the coming weeks which will flesh out the international picture. Already there are lots of fascinating regional trends emerging that require discussion, such as the Philippines that we looked at last week and a ‘back to business’ feeling in China. Next week in the run up the IEEE/PCA Cement Industry Technical Conference in Calgary, Canada we’ll look at the US.

The Philippines has been messing up the balance sheets of cement producers so far in 2017. Over the last week Holcim Philippines, CRH and Cemex have each reported lacklustre first quarter results dragged down by poor performance in the country. CRH’s chief executive officer Albert Manifold seemed to receive the worst kicking when analysts in a conference call refused to let it pass that the company’s sales had dropped by 12% year-on-year in Asia. Although to be fair to him the group’s Asian division only represented 2% of global sales at Euro0.5bn…

CRH’s quarterly financial reports tend to be in the form of sparse trading updates. So this lack of detail and CRH’s plans to invest over Euro300m in the market may have prompted Manifold’s grilling. According to the Irish Times he blamed the situation on cheap imports from south-east Asia pulling down the price. He then defended the investment on the grounds that local producers would have an advantage as they increase production capacity due to constant production and ‘guaranteed’ regulation and certification.

CRH isn’t the only organisation that has been burned by the Philippines. Before Christmas this column was praising the local industry for being in a boom. Cement sales had risen by 10.1% year-on-year to 20.1Mt according to CEMAP data in the first nine months of 2016 and the Duterte Infrastructure Plan was starting to target hundreds of billions of US dollars towards infrastructure spending. In the end cement sales rose by 6.6% to 26Mt for the full year in 2016 and this was a solid performance despite being brought down by the fourth quarter.

From the cement producers mentioned above, Cemex reported that its Ordinary Portland Cement sales volumes fell by 9% in the first quarter. It blamed the fall on bad weather and a tough quarter to compare against in 2015. Holcim Philippines said that its net sales fell by 12% to US$176m and it attributed it to lower public infrastructure spending, tighter industry competition and higher production expenses. Eagle Cement meanwhile, the fourth of the country’s major producers, is preparing to float on the local stock market in May 2017 to fund an expansion drive. The poor results of the other three cement producers may dent its proceeds from the initial public offering (IPO).

The words CRH’s Albert Manifold used in his defence were that, “Brand matters over there.” Funnily enough the other big Philippines cement industry news story that has been rumbling away for the last few months is an investigation by the Philippine Competition Commission (PCC) into the conduct of the Cement Manufacturers Association of the Philippines (CEMAP) and some of the leading cement producers. Naturally this includes CRH’s joint venture Republic Cement. The enquiry was prompted in mid-2016 by the accusation of anti-competitive agreements by a former trade official. He also made direct allegations against Ernesto Ordonez, the head of CEMAP. The investigation is on-going and perhaps it will find out exactly how much ‘brand matters’ in the Philippines.

Unsurprisingly the European Commission blocked Duna-Dráva Cement’s (DDC) attempted purchase of Cemex Croatia this week. Merging the country’s biggest cement producer with its largest importer was going to be a challenge for the commission. Whereas in previous transactions the various parties offered business disposals to ease the commission’s concerns, here all they were got was access to a cement terminal in Metković in southern Croatia. And this facility on the Neretva river is currently being leased by Cemex! Clearly this didn’t give the impression of being a long term solution.

Compare this with the merger between Lafarge and Holcim in 2015 where multiple sales were proposed to make sure the deal went through. Or look at the acquisition of Italcementi by HeidelbergCement in 2016 where the parties sold Italcementi’s Belgian subsidiary Compagnie des Ciments Belges to Cementir to make the deal happen. In comparison to these deals the attempt by HeidelbergCement and Schwenk, through their subsidiary DDC, comes across as a calculated gamble designed to test the resolve of the commission. If the commission had somehow passed the proposed acquisition then the companies would have cornered the market. If it turned it down, as it has, then nothing would be lost other than putting together the bid. HeidelbergCement had its mind on bigger things as it bought and then integrated Italcementi.

Commissioner Margrethe Vestager summed up the mood of the commission: “For mergers between direct competitors, we generally have a preference for a clean, structural solution, such as selling a production plant. HeidelbergCement and Schwenk decided not to offer that. Instead they proposed to give a competitor access to a cement terminal in southern Croatia. Essentially, this amounted to giving a competitor access to a storage facility – without existing customers or established access to cement, without brands and without sales or managerial staff.”

Elsewhere, the other big story in the industry news this week was Votorantim’s decision to focus on the lime business in Brazil by adding lime units to some of its existing cement plants. Given the dire state of the local cement and construction industry, initiatives to break the deadlock have been expected. The alternative is plant closures and divestures, such as the ongoing talks by Camargo Corrêa to sell the other big local producer, InterCement. Votorantim plans to build lime units attached to the cement plants at Nobres in Mato Grosso, Xambioa in Tocantins, Primavera in Pará and Idealiza in Goiás. Unfortunately the agricultural areas of the country and ones with cement plants don’t overlay neatly. Cement production is mainly focused in the south-eastern states and Votorantim are targeting the Cerrado, in the centre of the country, for the lime business.

The scale of the project, at US$50m, the scale of the lime business generally and the addition of lime units at cement plants suggest that the pivot to lime can only be a sideline to cement and construction. Given the similarity of the cement and lime production processes the announcement would be much more significant were Votorantim set to convert clinker kilns into lime ones. A notable example of this was at Cement Australia’s Gladstone plant in Queensland, Australia. Here a mothballed FCB-Ciment clinker kiln was converted into a lime kiln in the early 2000s. At the time the cost of the conversion project was valued at just under US$20m. If Votorantim was seriously thinking of doing this at a few of their underperforming cement plants then one would expect the bill to be higher than US$50m. However, it’s early days yet.